Comments on: Is This the Legacy We Want?

By: Mike Fichera

Mike Fichera — Thu, 29 Mar 2007 04:27:34 +0000

Scott, saw your blog. I’m Mike Fichera, one of the new Handbook Team writers. When doing the Legacy books, we modified a few things from the current formatting we’re using to give it more of a retro look. In the original Handbooks from the 1980s, art credits were not written on the page as per the 2000 series Handbooks, so we dropped them from 80s and the previous decades. But then, we had no room in the covers for the credits, and the credits were dropped. In retrospect, you’re right – we should have given the artists credit somewhere. The credits were returned for the Legacy 90s. Once I gather the info, I’ll post it on the Marvel.com/universe page.

As for the Crossroads image, my notes say we used art by Alan Kupperberg from Hulk Annual #13, p.6, panel 1 to be exact.
-Mike

By: Martin Wisse

Martin Wisse — Fri, 15 Dec 2006 14:04:15 +0000

Like Dave said, Marvel never credited the original artists of the artwork they snatched for the OHOTMU books, though they did make a point at the time of promoting the books as containing Goerge Perez art etc, at a time when George Perez had very publically stated not to want to work for Marvel anymore…

By: Dave White

Dave White — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 23:59:24 +0000

The art credits in the original handbook were only for the artists drawing the pin-up pictures, not the photos. And while I don’t like the idea of artists going on uncredited, in this case it’s got nothing to do with the “art reconstruction.” All that means is that they have to trace the panels and fake out areas of them to form a continuous image (you know, since back in the day they actually had word balloons on the art instead of floating somewhere in cyberspace).

By: Mathew

Mathew — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 17:37:30 +0000

Correct me if I am wrong, but since their inception in the 80’s, the handbooks have been classified as a publicity item. As such, they would be exempt from royalties owed to artists for the reprinting of their work.

I loved the original series, and the follow-up deluxe edition, but they were helmed by Mark Gruenwald, who treated the project with respect. I’ve been nothing but disappointed in the more recent editions. Frankly, they feel like they’ve been slapped togther by office interns. There no sense of care in the project. I wasn’t aware that they were indulging in art “reconstruction”, which just seems wrong and cheap.

By: JD

JD — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 17:01:13 +0000

Curiously, this is only a problem with the “themed” 2006 Marvel handbooks : Marvel Legacy, and those tying into main events (Civil War, Annihilation, Secret War, Decimation…). The “normal” handbooks (including the current A to Z series and the 2004-2005 themed handbooks) all carry proper art credits.

This is very strange. Why the discrepancy ?

By: gorjus

gorjus — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 15:34:28 +0000

David, there were–but it was at the front of the book, which made it like an artist’s index, as well.

Growing up, I used Who’s Who and the Handbooks to “train” myself to learn the art-styles of different creators . . . something that worked amazingly well. And you’re right to recall that Who’s Who actually boasted in ads about how much more “arty” than “sciencey” their volumes were. (I still preferred the Marvel).

By: David C

David C — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 14:48:35 +0000

Were there art credits in the original MU Handbooks? I dimly recall that there were not, and that it was an interesting point of differentiation between them and DC’s “Who’s Who” series, which gave rather prominent credit to the artists.

Anyway, it might be that they’re just copying the old style, as opposed to consciously snubbing artists.

By: Dwight Williams

Dwight Williams — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 14:47:52 +0000

Scanned pix as often as not here.

And as to the main point of “credit where credit is due”, I’m in absolute agreement. If the proper credits were intended and planned for yet accidentally dropped in the production process, that’s something that can be remedied, even if only in Marvel’s online errata pages(which do exist, thankfully).

By: Jon Hendry

Jon Hendry — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 05:52:36 +0000

Is it possible the “art reconstruction” people were actually tracing/copying the original art, and that’s what’s in this book?

By: James Meeley

James Meeley — Thu, 14 Dec 2006 04:54:32 +0000

Hey, Dr. Scott! JUst thought you should know that Blevins DID do an issue of the Hulk during the “Crossroads” saga. It was Incredible Hulk #310. He did a fill-in issue, which takes place between the depature of Sal Buscema (on issue #309) and the start of Mike Mignola (on issue #311). It’s actually part one of a two-pater, which Mignola did part two of. Funny thing about Mignola’s run is that only three issues in (on issue #313) he swapped art duties with John Byrne, who was doing Alpha Flight at the time.

Anyway, just thought you’d appreciate the info. Personally, I always enjoyed the “Crossroads” saga (it ran from Hulk #301-313), but then I have always enjoyed most Bill Mantlo scripted comics. Had a great time chatting with you at ECCC last year. Hope you can make it this year, since Heidi and I have the booth for Comic Fairplay again. I know she’d love to hang with you again, as well.

Best,
James Meeley